Talk:103 Colmore Row

Proposed deletion

This building is one of the most prominent on Birmingham's skyline, so I think the article should remain. However, I do agree that it could do with some more content. JRawle (Talk) 14:07, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree, this is a major part of the skyline. It is difficult to find information however. It is not exactly internationally renowned so finding links which are not adverts is very difficult. Believe me, whenever I find information on any of the articles I have created, I add it to them as soon as possible. - Erebus555 15:21, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, if it's prominent, at least say so. At present, the article itself gives no reason to suppose that the building deserves an article (which is why I prodded it). --ColinFine 19:11, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Redevelopment.

I have found an article on Property Week that says this building is to be acquired by British Land for £21 million. The problem is that if I put this information in the article, a reference will be needed and Property Week is a subscription based service. What should I do? - Erebus555 19:20, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

There's nothing in Verifiability that says the sources have to be free. I would add the information with a reference (WP:CITE) and a note that this is a subscription service. You might also reference the paper copy (if there is one) on the grounds that, at least in the UK, people are likely to be able to consult it in a public library. --ColinFine 20:10, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on 103 Colmore Row. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120225201116/http://www.emporis.com/en/bu/nc/ne/?id=102082 to http://www.emporis.com/en/bu/nc/ne/?id=102082

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 19:30, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 103 Colmore Row. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070930181807/http://www.birmingham.gov.uk/ELibrary?E_LIBRARY_ID=59&a=1134944545704 to http://www.birmingham.gov.uk/ELibrary?E_LIBRARY_ID=59&a=1134944545704

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:28, 13 June 2017 (UTC)